₦airaland Forum

Jehovah's witnesses practice Disfellowshiping and shunning. In their book, Enjoy Life Forever Lesson 57, point 4, this is said:

"If a person who has committed a serious sin refuses to follow Jehovah’s standards, he can no longer be part of the congregation. He is disfellowshipped, and we do not associate with him or even speak with him. Read 1 Corinthians 5:6, 11 and 2 John 9-11, and then discuss this question:"

They base their reasons on those two scriptures and they really mean it when they say they don't associate nor speak with such persons. To be sure, 1corinthian 5 speaks of Disfellowshiping, and also that one does not associate with such persons. How do we understand this instruction? That we strictly do not associate? When we check verses 9 and 10, one will understand why some will conclude that the counsel is strict shunning. Since the verse contrasts how impossible it will be to shun the world with shunning a brother. One can easily conclude that shunning a brother won't require your getting out of the world. So one should strictly shun. That conclusion would have been the best had that been the only scripture available for this subject.

However, at 2Thess 3:14 some who do not want to work are counselled to work, if not, the brothers should "stop associating" with them. This is a similar Greek word that appeared in the counsel at 1cor 5. JW create a distinction between this instruction and the one at 1cor 5. They say that the instruction at 2Thess 3:14 refer to sins that are not serious, and that such persons are handled using a marking talk delivered from the platform. After the congregation have heard the talk, they will now stop associating with that individual in social setting. This understanding is far from the truth.

First, the method Jehovah's witnesses use to handle serious sin is unscriptural. Even with the 1cor 5. Such sinners are handled during a gathering of the congregation, not by a body of elders. See 1cor 5:4. True, the elders will still be among the members, or even chair the gathering, but it is an open judgment on those sinners, it is not when elders enter into a private room with an individual. That is Watchtower policy, not bible.

So the instruction at 2Thess 3:14 is for the whole congregation. The elders will judge such matters in the view of all the congregation, they will all agree that certain person needs to be marked or disfellowshiped.

Is the sin of not working serious? Yes, it is a serious sin. We see that at 1Tim 5:8 where such persons are viewed as one who have disowned the faith. Even worse than person without Faith. Among JWs, any who doesn't provide for his family, when he is not in anyway incapacitated, can be disfellowshiped. So it's surprising that they say that 2thess 3:14 is a case of menial sin. Is it likely that they just want to have control over the flock and the Disfellowshiping injunction seems to provide them with such powers? Perhaps. But the truth is, that scripture helps us to see that the instruction at 1cor 5 is not meant to be applied to the extent the JW apply it. Those persons disfellowshiped are still brothers and they need to be helped.

It seems that the person with the power to disfellowship and hand over to Satan is the General Overseer. He is the one that issues that order for the congregation to apply. So whoever gets disfellowshiped or get mercy is not necessarily a function of repentance on his part. Now JW should pay attention here. It is believed by them that one gets disfellowshiped if he is unrepentant. That's true, but is it an automatic formula... If unrepentant, then you must go? No. The GO might still give such person time to repent even though he is unrepentant at present. He has the power to remove or retain.

Let's see why I said so.

At 2cor 12:21 Paul says:

" Perhaps when I come again, my God might humiliate me before you, and I may have to mourn over many of those who previously sinned but have not repented of their uncleanness and sexual immorality and brazen conduct that they have practiced."

First, we see they are many, and they sinned and had not repented as at the time he is writing. When did they start this sin? Chapter 13:1-3 helps us:

This is the third time I am coming to you. “On the testimony of two or three witnesses every matter must be established.”  2 Although I am absent now, it is as if I were present for the second time, and I give my warning in advance to those who sinned previously and to all the rest, that if ever I come again I will not spare them,"

By saying third time, Paul is showing that these sinners had been sinning since he founded that congregation, this will be around 5years now. Yet, they are unrepentant and not yet disfellowshiped. Among these are still persons teaching different doctrine and challenging Paul's apostleship. So we see they were really unrepentant to even challenge Paul instead of fighting to win over their sins. What can we learn?

1. At 1 Cor 5 Paul ordered the incestuous man to be disfellowshiped, yet there were still unrepentant wrongdoers in Corinth at that time. So Paul's order may be because the sin of this incestuous man was too serious and unheard of even in the world. It does not mean that it was just a case of unrepentance. Unrepentance is inclusive, but it wasn't the only reason.

2. It was in the hand of the GO, not just the elders to order for a disfellowship. Paul spoke of him not sparing them at 2cor 13:2, and in verse 10 he says he has the power to build up and to tear down, obviously meaning to remove or to retain.

Supporting the view that the GO has that power to order for a disfellowship is the words of Jesus to the Angels in the congregations in Asia Minor. These Angels are individuals caring for different cities. And these cities would be composed of many house congregations. Persons like Timothy, Titus etc are examples of persons who took care of congregations in different cities. So when Paul died, these men, Angels as used in the book of Revelation, took over. Jesus words was to commend them and also counsel them on areas they weren't doing well.

If we venture to what Jesus said, we see in some congregations, the angel allowed the sect of Nicolaus to remain, while in another, sects wasn't allowed. In some Prophetess Jezebel flourished. To further show that repentance wasn't the only factor to retain individuals in the congregation, notice that at Rev 2:21 Jesus had previously given Jezebel time to repent, but she was not willing. Now Jesus is given her the last warning to repent in verse 22, that is, additional time to repent although unrepentant at the time. All these while she was allowed to be in the congregation by the Overseer of the congregation Thyatira. Now the letter Jesus sent was to come to this man, not to the elders in that area. This Angel will be the one to order the elders in those areas to remove her. Of course, she would not be seen as an enemy, but be counselled as a sister.

Another example to show that shunning is not implied by Paul's letter at 1cor 5, is the fact that even Jehovah himself did speak to disfellowshiped persons. So I am not against disfellowship, but I think the scriptures are against strict shunning. One can limit his relationship with one disfellowshiped or even one not disfellowshiped yet but has a bad unchristian habit. You need not make such ones your close friends. Jehovah even initiated a discussion with Satan at Job 1:7; 2:2. Jesus spoke with Satan  (Matt 4:8-10), even with demons. These demons pleaded, and he granted their requests (Matt 8:29-32). While Jesus was on earth, he associate with those considered by his religious leaders as expelled for sin. (Matt 9:11).

The witnesses also point to 2John 9-11 as a proof. This instruction is not talking about grave sinners. It refers to preaching incorrect doctrines. The letter is evidently directed to an individual. Some of course feel that a congregation is in focus here. But the former seems obvious.

John was saying that this lady shouldn't welcome anyone with a different message. She was to avoid listening to such message, not the individual himself. Verse 10 says:

10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him."

That is, if such person comes and does not bring the true teaching. Perhaps the person is engaged in preaching. But what if such person comes and brings a wholesome teaching? Obviously the woman will accept him. Notice another thing, what if such person comes without any preaching, but he came to ask about your welfare, he came to just say a normal greeting and walk away, or he came to seek for secular work? According to JWs, you will still not speak to such person. But that is not what this place is talking about. The point is on wrong message, not on the individual. If a church preacher sees you to tell you the need to repent of your sins, is that the incorrect message John has in mind? Not at all. The funny thing is that the JWs do still carry false message to people's homes, I mean message they one day say its false, yet they expect you to keep putting up with those false teachings until their GB will change it. At times they don't change it, or they change it to another worse teaching. But they want you to keep welcoming them.

If among JWs and you welcome a preacher from another church, you could be disfellowshiped by them. But the same issue happened at 2 Cor 11, yet Paul didn't disfellowship anybody. We read:

4 For as it is, if someone comes and preaches a Jesus other than the one we preached, or you receive a spirit other than what you received, or good news other than what you accepted, you easily put up with him."

This congregation allowed people to preach a different doctrine, what JW will call apostasy, yet no one was disfellowshiped. But they were only counselled against such. But in another occasion, people who opposed Paul preached correct message about Christ, Paul rejoiced instead. We read, Phil 1

"True, some are preaching the Christ out of envy and rivalry, but others out of goodwill.  16 The latter are proclaiming the Christ out of love, for they know that I have been appointed to defend the good news;  17 but the former do it out of contentiousness, not with a pure motive, for they are intending to create trouble for me in my prison bonds.  18 With what result? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is being proclaimed, and I rejoice over this. In fact, I will also keep on rejoicing,"

Paul didn't say " oh no, they are Christendom, they are apostates, God will destroy them in Armageddon." Paul was happy that Christ is being preached. So John's point was against wrong message, not just every message coming from others.

There were times when false teachers were disfellowshiped however, example, Hymenaeus and Philectus. (2tim 2:17). But this must be a serious apostasy that became popular and notorious. Why did I say so? Because the superfine apostles at 2cor 11 to 13 were doing the same thing, yet they remained. We will also notice that the disfellowship of these men affected those who did the wrong, not those who listened or associated with them. 2tim 2:18 shows that they were subverting the faith of some, but those who were being subverted were not disfellowshiped. Paul too didn't threaten those who listened to the superfine apostles with disfellowship at 2cor 11. Lastly, even while the incest man was under disfellowship, some in the congregation didn't follow Paul's advise to discipline the man. We can see this at 2cor 2:6. Those who obeyed are in majority, meaning that there were minority that didn't obey. Paul didn't order that those ones that didn't obey should also be disfellowshiped as JWs do.

We can clearly see from the scriptures that JWs go overboard in applying disfellowship against their members. A single sin will warrant an immediate Judicial Committee. If you discuss with anyone disfellowshiped, you stand to be disfellowshiped yourself if you don't stop talking to them. They obviously do this to maintain control and silence any critic. They even make it righteousness to report any who go against their view. So we can see that the policy is not bible based, it's geared towards maintaining a high control religion. That is the logical conclusion.

MaxInDHouse:
You're surely reading from older publications if this is what you think about God's people today because the new light has revealed many things that's totally different from all of these. I personally don't feel attracted to any female dressed like a mourner so the makeup, short skirts issue is PERSONAL.
Disorderly now means much more than these frivolities we are not to be master over the faith of anyone because each person is standing based on his or her conviction!

I think that the disorderly conduct still refer to issues not warranting a judicial Committee.

In your Organize book, this was said:

10 Occasionally, someone not guilty of practicing a grave sin for which he could be expelled from the congregation shows flagrant disregard for God’s standard that should govern Christians. This could include such things as being extremely lazy, critical, or dirty. He could be “meddling with what does not concern [him].” (2 Thess. 3:11) Or he might be one who schemes to take material advantage of others or indulges in entertainment that is clearly improper. The disorderly conduct is serious enough to reflect badly on the congregation, and it has the potential to spread to other Christians."

I keep advising you to research first before you reply.

Christmas being a popular holiday, thrills many. Expectation runs high as the day gradually approaches. However, JWs, like few other Christians are opposed to the celebration. Their major reason being that the celebration has a pagan religious origin and still retains that religious significance. But does Christmas have a pagan origin?

The short answer is, no one knows for sure, what we do know is that neither Jesus nor his early disciples celebrated Christmas. That celebration had not developed back then like having church buildings, operating a multi billion dollar corporation, attending christian conventions have not developed among christians that time. On the aspect of the pagan origin, the story that is popular is that Emperor Constantine established December 25 to be a new day to commemorate the birth of Christ to christianize the pagan's sacred day, and thus entice pagans. The Encyclopedia Britannica puts it this way:

“One widespread explanation of the origin of this date is that December 25 was the Christianizing of the dies solis invicti nati (“day of the birth of the unconquered sun”), a popular holiday in the Roman Empire that celebrated the winter solstice as a symbol of the resurgence of the sun, the casting away of winter and the heralding of the rebirth of spring and summer.”

This theory, though popular, doesn't have any support from the early christians themselves. None of the Apostolic Fathers says that they did shift the date to coincide with pagan holiday. How then did this idea start to be popular?

An article in the biblical archaeology helps us with the answer:

“... It’s not until the 12th century that we find the first suggestion that Jesus’ birth celebration was deliberately set at the time of pagan feasts. A marginal note on a manuscript of the writings of the Syriac biblical commentator Dionysius bar-Salibi states that in ancient times the Christmas holiday was actually shifted from January 6 to December 25 so that it fell on the same date as the pagan Sol Invictus holiday. In the 18th and 19th centuries, Bible scholars spurred on by the new study of comparative religions latched on to this idea.”

The idea is further encouraged by the Christmas traditions that many link to pagan root. So since it appears that christians borrow Christmas tradition from pagan root, one can understand why the theory sailed for years.

However, there seem to be challenges to this idea as recent studies are beginning to show. One of the challenges is mentioned by encyclopedia Britannica. It says:

“One of the difficulties with this view is that it suggests a nonchalant willingness on the part of the Christian church to appropriate a pagan festival when the early church was so intent on distinguishing itself categorically from pagan beliefs and practices.”

In other words, as at the time this December 25 is recognized to have been a celebration of Christ's birth in Rome, around 336 C.E, the church Fathers are rather distinguishing themselves from pagan practices. This would have been a point pagan would use to show that christians were rather becoming like them had this theory been the case. A second weakness of this view is that this December 25 celebration was not done in Constantinople until 380. That would have been strange had this theory been true. How could Constantine not introduce such a feast to his own city till that time? This would be around 50 years after the establishment of Constantinople.

In fact the work of Steven Hijmans in the iconography of the Sun in Roman Religion is currently the major attack on the whole theory. Although time is needed for more debate on the findings of Steven Hijmans among scholars, but till his findings gets defeated and the above mentioned challenges gets knocked down, this theory of a pagan root for Christmas needs to rest. The theory is as a matter of fact known as History of Religions theory (HRT).

There is a second theory gaining attention, however. A theory heralded by Thomas Talley. It is called the Calculation Theory. The encyclopedia Britannica says of it:

“A second view suggests that December 25 became the date of Jesus’ birth by a priori reasoning that identified the spring equinox as the date of the creation of the world and the fourth day of creation, when the light was created, as the day of Jesus’ conception (i.e., March 25). December 25, nine months later, then became the date of Jesus’ birth. For a long time the celebration of Jesus’ birth was observed in conjunction with his baptism, celebrated January 6.”

So light was created in March 25, according to this calculation. This, as the thought goes, means that Jesus the light was conceived by Mary in March 25. Nine months later, December 25th, Jesus was born. Does that sound unreasonable to you? Yes it is, but that's the method used in ancient times by some christians. Not all however arrived at the same date, as we shall see later.

The earliest mention of December 25 as the date Jesus was born is in 221 CE by Sextus Africanus. In a biblical archaeology article TC Schmidt is said to believe that Hippolytus associated Jesus birth to be around December 25. And Hippolytus incription used to support this is dated around 222 CE.

Commenting further on the different dates available in ancient times, the biblical archaeology article on TC Schmidt continues:

“... The early church fathers’ calendrical calculations of Jesus’s conception resulted in the date.


The early church fathers believed that Jesus was conceived on Passover and born nine months later. However, they differed in their dates for Passover, which is calculated on the lunar calendar. This resulted in a variety of dates for Christ of dates for Christmas, one of which was December 25.”

So the Calculation Theory posits that the December 25 didn't first issue from pagans. This view seem to gain support since the pagan celebration of December 25 began in 274 CE, when Emperor Aurelian established that feast for the birth of Sol Invictus. However, we see the date already being arrived at prior to that date using a method they knew back then.

It should also be noted that the History of Religion's Theory agrees that the celebration of Christ's birth had already been part of the feast of Epiphany before it was separated from that feast to a different date, December 25. That shows that there had been a celebration of the birth of Christ even before the claimed shift to December 25. That alone helps us see the weakness of pagan origin for the celebration of Jesus birth. The only point the HRT can argue is the December 25 date, not the celebration. Even the December 25 too has a major opposing argument against it. Not to forget that while churches in the west is seen to have moved the date to December 25, the churches in the East kept their Christmas celebration on January 6, while some on 19th. So if the HRT is true, how come we have those who celebrate Christmas on January 6 and 19th as far back as fourth century?

Another important destructive point to consider is the one made by Talley himself. His findings showed that Constantine was not based in Rome during the period following the council of Nicea. And this period was essential to the syncretism argued by the HRT.

Professor Susan K. Roll, who is a major proponent of HRT puts it this way:

“The major contribution made by Talley to the question of Constantine's influence on the institution of the Christmas feast in Rome is simply the recognition that Constantine was not based in Rome in the years following the council of Nicea, the decisive period for the establishment of Christmas according to the “solar syncretism” theory.”
Towards The Origins of Christmas (footnote)

So we can see that although many Christmas customs issue from pagans, they are hardly the originators of this feast.

There is no reason therefore to judge others who may chose to celebrate this occasion. You might chose not to celebrate it, that's your decision. In as much as the focus is on Christ and not engaging in worldly behaviors, one with strong faith can celebrate. Finally, let's heed the bible advise at ROM 14:

1Accept the one whose faith is weak, without quarreling over disputable matters. 2One person’s faith allows them to eat anything, but another, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3The one who eats everything must not treat with contempt the one who does not, and the one who does not eat everything must not judge the one who does, for God has accepted them. 4Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. And they will stand, for the Lord is able to make them stand."

Bump.

achorladey:
I added that part where they use the term reasonableness and discernment to show how they can very much disfellowship the person who is disorderly under the guise of discernment and reasonableness of the person causing division in the congregation.

Hahaha. I see. It happens.

achorladey:
I am very much familiar with the point you made. The execution of these procedures are done by men not angels from heaven. When a person is disorderly an one of the elders brings the angle of causing division in the congregation into it, that person will get disfellowshipped. When the disorderliness is a serious sin classed under causing division. That person will get disfellowshipped

I understand you. Not all elders understand the policy of their GB. You can see Maxim na. If Maxim is an elder, you can imagine the kind of that will happen. Hahaha

The truth is, scripturally, disorderly ones is the same as serious sin, but we are just discussing how their GB sees it.

Disorderly matters refer to matters not considered to be serious sins eg. Too lazy, short skirts, excessive make ups etc. The GB find it hard to fix what is disorderly behavior because, the proper understanding of that book of thesalonians is serious sin that warrant judicial Committee. But the GB doesn't want to see it so. Why? Because that place states that such disorderly ones should also be seen as brothers, and no one should view them as an enemy. Since the GB feel that they must shun according to their understanding, they now gave that scripture a different meaning. The problem now is to state the sins involved. That scripture is a major hit against their shunning policy. I will one day make a write up against this shunning policy. By then I will explain more.

achorladey:
You don start your lies and manipulations packed into your madness and insanities peddling brains abi?

MARKING DISORDERLY ONES 76

At times it may be necessary to mark those who display a flagrant disregard for Jehovah’s standards though not practicing a grave sin that merits judicial action. (2 Thess. 3:6, 14, 15; w99 7/15 pp. 29-31) This could include such things as being grossly lazy or critical or being a profitless talker who is a constant ‘meddler with what does not concern him.’ (2 Thess. 3:11) It may involve one who schemes to take material advantage of others, indulges in entertainment that is clearly improper, dates an unbeliever, or dates when not legally or Scripturally free.—od chap. 14 pars. 9-12. 77. If the disorderly conduct is generally unknown to others and poses no threat to their spiritual well-being, usually it is best to handle things through admonition and counsel. The body of elders should not be hasty in deciding to give a warning talk. However, if the individual does not see the error of his way but continues to be an unwholesome influence, a warning talk may be given to the congregation. Elders must use reasonableness and discernment in determining whether a particular situation is sufficiently serious and disturbing to require a warning talk.

It is that last part I want Sand2022 to concentrate upon. The foot soldiers have the leeway to use what they call reasonableness and discernment to send the disorderly packing out of that religious organization

No. That's not what the last part is saying. It is rather saying that the foot soldiers should should discernment to know when to give a warning talk. Warning talk is given on top of their platform. But they may chose to just give the person private counsel rather than make a warning talk. However, since they are close to the situation, they would know when the issue is particularly disturbing to the congregation to warrant a warning talk. That's the point.

MaxInDHouse:
The highlighted is WRONG!

We MUST disfellowship anyone who is walking disorderly before you become one of us you would have learned all the things that leads to disfellowship but when you MISTAKENLY does it we MUST make sure it's not intentional so that you will be WARNED but then if you're not willing to accept the discipline we will show you the door: DISFELLOWSHIP!

You really need to go back and research like I always tell you. You claim to be an elder and you are saying this.

achorladey:
In the final analysis when the disorderly is under 4 that person will be disfellowshipped

Those places you posted is talking about serious sins that warrant judicial Committee. A group of three men or above who reviews if someone is repentant to warrant a reproof or disfellowship. That is different from handling disorderly ones.

Disorderly ones are marked. This marking involve warning talk speaking about the deviation by that individual, but the name of the individual is not mentioned during such talk. These disorderly behavior is not serious sins. This one's marked are still brothers or sisters. While disfellowshiped ones are not called brothers.

achorladey:
Whenever they classify anyone as disorderly, that's one ground for disfellowshipping such person. The reason there are many cases of those that got hammered regarding that policy and procedure regarding wearing beards

No. They generally don't disfellowship disorderly persons. They only give warning talk about them.

oteneaaron:
Do you know that the Madrid High Court in a ruling recently called your organization a "sect or cult"?

This is from a press release about the judgment:

That report by Avoidjw website seem to be false. I stand corrected. Bitterwinter.org shows that the Association of Victims of JW lost that suit with a fine imposed on them. I don't believe that report.

Jehovah's witnesses should be seen a control group, not a destructive cult. They have a form of control, but it's wrong to see them as destructive cult. They just have a different view of things. No matter how odd, it is still their own worldview.

MaobiCarl:
Well there are cases of disfellowship of brothers wearing beards. Assuming you're approached by elders and you act irresponsibly to the extent of questioning the governing body's policy on beards.. Your case will turn to a disfellowship case... How you react to the judiciary panel will determines the verdict

Seriously? Well, generally it is not a Disfellowshiping offence. But there are cases where it may turn to that. It's possible. But it will be very rare.

MaxInDHouse:
Birthday celebration is not purely secular!

I'm from a religiously divided family, some are real Traditionalists, some claim Christians and others are Muslims. The Traditionalists in my family are deeply rooted in it so i learned a lot from them. Traditionalists use their birthdays to celebrate themselves so most of them often do something to be commemorated annually when they're no more.
The Israelites don't do anything as such when it comes to birthday celebrations they just don't think of it as most servants of God among them were INSPIRED to write bad things about birthdays! Job 3:3; Ecclesiastes 7:1; Jeremiah 20:14

Jesus Christ commanded his friends to remember the date he died not his birthday.

That's the HERITAGE of God's people: JEHOVAH'S PEOPLE! Isaiah 54:17b

I dont know your area very well. Here, birthdays are largely a secular occasion.

But if I may ask, what do you understand by the phrase, religious occasion?

NowYouKnow:
Jehovah's Witnesses abstain from celebrating birthdays due to our interpretation of certain biblical principles. While the Bible does mention birthday celebrations, it is in a context that Jehovah's Witnesses believe associates them with practices that go against our religious beliefs.

For example, in the Bible, both instances of birthday celebrations involve negative outcomes: Pharaoh's birthday celebration (Genesis 40:20-22) and King Herod's birthday party, where John the Baptist was beheaded (Matthew 14:6-10). Jehovah's Witnesses take these instances as indications that birthday celebrations are not aligned with our understanding of biblical principles.

Additionally, we strive to avoid any customs or traditions that have pagan or non-Christian origins. Since the historical roots of birthday celebrations can be traced back to various pagan practices, we Jehovah's Witnesses choose not to partake in them as a matter of religious conviction.

That is basically the case, but not entirely so. They avoid any celebration or any item with pagan religious origin, and still retains that pagan religious significance in the area the witness lives. The main point is the religious significance. Once the religious significance is off, a witness in such area can engage in it.

Birthdays in most cases don't even have religious meaning in most areas of the world. In most cases, the celebration is purely secular. I agree that most witnesses don't seem to understand this fact.

MaobiCarl:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-T5ix4smik?si=qIQeaoqFi3Nib844

So after many decades of demonising, ostracising and sometimes disfellowshiping male members who opt to wear or keep their God given natural beards. The leaders of the Jehovah's Witnesses sect has approved responsible male brothers to wear and keep beards if they choose in a recent update aired on jw broadcast dated December 15,2023.

On this update nos 8 they've agreed that is non scriptural to instruct Christians on how to look outwardly uniformly. They now accept that spirituality is the basis of Christianity not outward appearances or trying to appear or sound different from other competing religious organisations .

There's high and mixed emotions amongst the members now. Many are disappointed while few who has been scorned by elders and congregation leaders for trying to leave there beards to grow may be the only ones excited.

But personally they( Governing Body) needs to apologise to there members for trying to make them look like a cult. Cus is only a cult that that enforce a dress pattern or grooming for members from varying cultures and backgrounds all around the world

Source :https://www.jw.org/en/news/region/global/2023-Governing-Body-Update-8/

That's commendable. The religion is too controlling. In the name of unity, they want to regulate even how you make love with your wife. The issue of beard generated controversy for years in the west, but all the opposers of this now changed doctrine were discriminated, viewed as disorderly, and were never given church work. Just beard. Religious leaders are really going too far. In some cases, they approved beard in one location, and disallowed it in another.

All these while the GB was wrong.

They seem to have poor bible scholars over there or that the bible scholars are doing great work, but the leadership doesn't often listen to their advise. Because this issue is no-brainer if you ask me.

However, I don't think they disfellowship for this. But they just don't see you as a JW in most areas eg , Nigeria. You can't occupy any office in most JW congregation. In some areas, if you claim you're a witness, they will first check if you have a beard. If you do, they just conclude you're not. Cos you have mark of the beast.lol

But we need to commend them for such change. Atleast they changed.

Aemmyjah:
Does God Exist?
The Bible’s answer
Yes, the Bible provides compelling evidence that God exists. It encourages us to build faith in God, not by blindly believing religious assertions, but by using our “power of reason” and “mental perception.” (Romans 12:1; 1 John 5:​20, footnote) Consider the following lines of reasoning based on the Bible:

1. The existence of an orderly universe containing life points to a Creator. The Bible says: “Of course, every house is constructed by someone, but the one who constructed all things is God.” (Hebrews 3:4) Although this logic is simple, many well-educated people find it to be powerful. For example, the late astronomer Allan Sandage once said regarding the universe: “I find it quite improbable that such order came out of chaos. There has to be some organizing principle. God to me is a mystery, but is the explanation for the miracle of existence, why there is something instead of nothing.”

2. As humans, we have an innate desire to understand the meaning and purpose of life, a type of hunger that can remain after our physical needs have been met. This is part of what the Bible calls our “spiritual need,” which includes the desire to know and worship God. (Matthew 5:3; Revelation 4:​11) This spiritual need not only gives evidence that God exists but also indicates that he is a loving Creator who wants us to satisfy that need.​—Matthew 4:4.

3. Detailed prophecies in the Bible were written centuries ahead of time and came true exactly as predicted. The accuracy and detail of those predictions strongly suggest that they came from a superhuman source.​—2 Peter 1:​21.

4. Bible writers had scientific knowledge that was beyond the understanding of their contemporaries. For example, in ancient times many peoples believed that the earth was supported by an animal, such as an elephant, a boar, or an ox. In contrast, the Bible says that God is “suspending the earth upon nothing.” (Job 26:7) Similarly, the Bible correctly describes the shape of the earth as a “sphere,” or “globe.” (Isaiah 40:22, footnote; Douay Version) Many people feel that the most reasonable explanation for such advanced understanding is that Bible writers received their information from God.

5. The Bible answers many difficult questions, the type of questions that when not satisfactorily answered can lead a person to atheism. For example: If God is loving and all-powerful, why is there suffering and evil in the world? Why is religion so often an influence for bad rather than for good?​—Titus 1:​16.

***For example, the late astronomer Allan Sandage once said regarding the universe: “I find it quite improbable that such order came out of chaos. There has to be some organizing principle. God to me is a mystery, but is the explanation for the miracle of existence, why there is something instead of nothing.”

©https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/does-god-exist/

Fine one.

In addition miracles both past and present supports the existence of God.

MaxInDHouse:
Christians are SOLDIERS under the command of Christ Jesus and as soldiers we must obey the last order. People who don't know what we have but lived by conscience as men of integrity will be resurrected based on conscience that's why God gave such ones a merit for keeping their integrity even though they don't know the righteousness of God {Romans 2:14-15} but once you have met those practicing what is beneficial and you stubbornly stick to your conscience that's the time your personal opinion becomes a problem for you why? That means you just want to do what pleases you not what you know is best {Isaiah 64:6} you're to give God your best {Matthew 22:37} meaning what you know is up to date not presenting what you're not fully convinced as the best.

I was a Muslim from birth but after seeing that my religion is not up to date on righteousness of God i began seeking for what is best that's how i met the JWs so i joined them in order to give God my best as one who love him. If you stick to your religion and say members from a religion (that your own people despises so much) are OK then you're deceiving yourself, what exactly makes the enmity between these religions and JWs so intense? Do you really care to know? Genesis 3:15 compare to Luke 16:26
it's the best you're to give God as one who love him.

Jesus puts it this way:

And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment.Mark 12:30

So my friend if you're 100% certain of your beliefs work with all your heart {Revelations 22:11-12} whatever you can do for your God now do it with all your strength! Ecclesiastes 9:10

As for me i'm 100% certain that no human can cross into God's Kingdom now if you're not one of Jehovah's Witnesses or seriously studying with them to become one of them the only way angels are writing names according to God's word is those studying the Bible together one on the just as JWs are doing with their neighbours! Malachi 3:16

May you have PEACE!

Good. I like that. It's best to say that's what you believe. I respect that even though I have a different opinion as to your stand, but it's certainly your belief and you're entitled to it.

Shalom!

Janosky:
*Oga, your argument is built on quick sand. .

Do you have Acts 9:3-9 in your Bible?
Oga Sand2022, who converted Saul?
You know it's Jesus Christ.

Acts 9:1-6
New English Translation
The Conversion of Saul

*After his conversion,who did Jesus send to lead Saul?
Ananias of course!
Acts 9:10-17
Now there was a disciple in Damascus named Ananias. The[v] Lord[w] said to him in a vision, “Ananias,” and he replied, “Here I am,[x] Lord.” 11 Then the Lord told him, “Get up and go to the street called ‘Straight,’[y] and at Judas’ house look for a man from Tarsus named Saul. For he is praying, 12 and he has seen in a vision[z] a man named Ananias come in and place his hands on him so that he may see again.” 13 But Ananias replied,[aa] “Lord, I have heard from many people[ab] about this man, how much harm he has done to your saints in Jerusalem, 14 and here he has authority from the chief priests to imprison[ac] all who call on your name!”[ad] 15 But the Lord said to him, “Go, because this man is my chosen instrument[ae] to carry my name before Gentiles and kings and the people of Israel.[af] 16 For I will show him how much he must suffer for the sake of my name.”[ag] 17 So Ananias departed and entered the house, placed[ah] his hands on Saul[ai] and said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you came here,[aj] has sent me so that you may see again and be filled with the Holy Spirit.”[ak]

** Oga,Did Paul (Saul) set up shop as sole proprietor Churchpreneur (the common trend in Christendom)?

[b]Acts 9:19-20 is the answer
For several days[ao] he was with the disciples in Damascus, 20 and immediately he began to proclaim Jesus in the synagogues,[ap] saying, “This man is the Son of God.”[aq]

* Acts 9:19-20, was Paul playing football and chess with the disciples "for several days?"
The disciples trained, guided Paul "for several days" to grasp the basics before Paul set out to preach in verse 20.

*** Nutshell
Paul had leaders before he became one of leaders with other Apostles/Elders in Jerusalem.

Oga, Hebrew 13:7,17 & Acts chapters 2,9 &15 are in your Bible.
Let the gospel of the Apostles sink in to your heart.

Or write your own bible

It is easier to help a dumb person who is humble. But if he has pride, it's best to let him alone, so that he will keep thinking he knows when he knows nothing. Enjoy your life.

MaxInDHouse:
Guy we're both saying the same thing now so from your own point of view JW's teachings doesn't stop sincere ones among them from having salvation but from the fact i have you (not those who never met JWs before) can't see God's kingdom if you fail to become one of JWs now!

I know you won't like this but that's the bitter truth.


Jesus explained that those who reject the message of his disciples are doomed {Matthew 10:14-15} and today over 41,000 different religions are claiming Christians with contracting teachings and conflicting doctrines so one may conclude that due to all these confusion God may not judge based on the things we read in the scriptures but then Jesus commanded his own disciples to have LOVE among themselves just as he had for them {John 15:12} he also commanded them to LOVE their neighbours as themselves {Mark 12:31} and to LOVE and pray for those who are looking for ways to hurt them! Luke 6:27-28
He taught them that if what they're practicing is according to his teachings all of them will treat one another like one family {Mark 10:29-30} which is in harmony with what God's servants prophesied before Jesus {Isaiah 2:2-4 & Micah 4:1-3} the one and only person whose wise counsel will make this possible in midst of imperfect humans of different races is the Prince of Peace {Isaiah 9:6} that's why Jesus could confidently proclaim any group of people or organization that fulfilled this task as living WITNESSES of his earthly mission! Act 1:8

So whoever has SEEN any group of people SUCCESSFULLY doing this thing but chose to always speak against them is no longer speaking against those imperfect humans but against the SPIRIT mobilizing them to do the will of God. Matthew 12:31-32

The only thing that could save you now is if you can present a better performing group with regards to the doing of God's will failure to do so means you're an enemy of the Prince whose subjects are working out peace globally among men of goodwill so extermination is waiting for you! Luke 19:27

I will remind you all these things you said by January 2024.

He that humble himself will be exalted, but he that exalt himself will be humiliated. The pride you guys put on even with low bible understanding is much. Maybe God has kept you people in a constant back and forth scriptural merry go round because of this pride. Such that you ll keep learning but never coming to the accurate knowledge of the truth. Jesus has been assigned by God to be the judge, no one else. Why not stop being presumptuous and let Jesus do that? Why say one must come to you to be saved? Are you Jesus?

Let me ask you Mr savior:

- On what basis will those righteous ones who lived from 2nd century to the 18th century be saved to even live in heaven as your doctrine posit? And none of them ever preached against hell fire till death.

- on what basis will Russel enter heaven even as he served the false god of Giza, celebrated what you called pagan Christmas, and had the title Pastor, and he held that till death?

- On what basis will Rutherford enter heaven when he called belief in superior authority to refer to government as false teachings, stopped the elder arrangement, called himself faithful slave and he kept that belief until death?

God is not searching for a better performing group. Faith in His son makes you part of God's house. Divergent opinions is human, God knows that truth in all these divergent opinions. What God is watching is not your divergent opinion, but your heart condition. He knows one who has a different opinion, and knows if that one can change if God corrects him or her. If God sees that you can change that view deep within if He confronts you with your error, He will save you. JWs keep making that mistake. You can't get all the truth unless God tells you. God knows that. See the example of Job.

Both Job and his companions were all theologically wrong in one way or another. We could even say that Elihu was the only one without error, we can surmise that since God didn't rebuke him. But who was God's number one righteous man among all? Job. Why? Because he knows all the truth? No. The famous "God gives and God takes" came from Job. In fact God rebuked Job with many questions since he challenged God. But what was the difference? When God corrected Job, He accepted and repented in dust and ashes. That is what God is looking out for not doctrinal correctness Mr savior. If God sees that your doctrinal position was not out of hatred for Him, and that if He just rebuke you you will repent, to God you're still His child.

In the religion Jesus worshiped, Judaism, there were divergent opinions. There were saducees, pharisees, John and his disciples, Jesus and his disciples. All of them didn't have one teaching. John's disciples fasted, Jesus disciples didn't fast. John disciples had a prayer taught them by John. Jesus disciples had theirs. Among Pharisees and Sadducees are different Rabbi with their individual students or disciples. There were herodians, Free People, Zillots etc all in one true religion, Judaism. Even with the divergent opinion, they all worshipped Jehovah together. But outside, they have different opinion on some matters.

During the time of apostles, divergent opinion didn't fly away. Remember when Paul returned to Jerusalem and complain came that he was teaching apostasy from Moses? That was the issue of circumcision. The elders advised him to go and fulfill a vow in the temple. What those that teach us?

First, that while Paul was teaching against observing the law of Moses and saying that the law was out of the way, the elders in Jerusalem were following the mosaic law and it's practices. That perhaps is one of the reasons Paul wrote the letter to the hebrews. He used that book to teach them, both the elders and members of the congregation in Jerusalem why the law is out of the way.

Even among the elders in Jerusalem are those called "supporters of circumcision".

But inspite of these, both Paul and the brothers in Jerusalem were still christians. God knows within these divergent opinions, ones who are sincere for Him.

If you search for God's people by looking for group that perfectly love themselves, no quarrel, no disunity whatsoever, you are deceiving yourself. The so called division can happen in a group being used by God. In fact aweful thjngs can happen in God's house, yet God is still using them. It's time JW stop using this tactics. They use these to poison the mind of their members to hate the body of Christ in Christendom.

Don't you read your bible? Apart from the example I gave above, didn't you see that Israelites, although convenanted to do God's will, love themselves and their neighbours. What did we see? Didn't they often worship false gods, committed immorality, even fought among themselves? At one time, the whole Israel fought Benjamin. At another, Jephthah and his Gibeah people fought Ephraimites, at another David fought Israel who had gone with Absalom, Israel did fight also with Judah when the two tribes divided. What now? God is no longer using them? Nonsense.

If you focus your attention on the errors in in the body of Christ or supposed division, you will reach the wrong conclusion. God doesn't want division. Yes, but He deals with imperfect humans whom He knows will manifest imperfect tendencies. God is not a man to easily and quickly abandon His body because he sees these. No. Don't let JWs leadership poison your mind with this lie. This was exactly what the Essenes in quonram did. They separated from Jerusalem worship because they saw that the priest and pharisees were corrupt. Truly, these persons were corrupt, there were divergent opinion back then, but God have not left Judaism. He was there for those who worshiped him wholesouled even in erronic teachings. Eg, Simeon, Anna, John the Baptist, Mary, Joseph. All these were still following the divergent teachings of these Pharisees and Sadducees. Even John the Baptist inquired if there anither Messiah coming. That could be because of what he was taught. Yet he pleased God.

If you keep looking for that perfect group with no differences of opinion within it, you will be misled. When God shifted his attention to Christianity, he poured out his spirit as evidence. The same is true today. That outpouring of spirit with miracles is the divine sign of approval, not merely correct understanding. Not that correct understanding is wrong, but God knows you can't get it all unless he supernaturally tells you.

Don't think that God will keep shifting group He uses because of divergent opinion. No.

Janosky:
Oga, 1 Thessalonians 5:12 & Hebrews 13:17 PROVEN there are leaders/Governing Council/Body.

The leaders/ Governing Council/Body made the decision for the entire congregation.
Everyone was in agreement.
No room for dissent, that's the point of verse 22, elaborated in Thessalonians & Hebrews.
Looking at Acts chapter 2:

Are you sure you read before you reply or you reply before reading? How is all these gaffe reply to this comment? Let me give you another try.

Let's first look at those who partook in the decision making in that meeting. The part that is often omitted by the JW leadership when making their claim is verse 22. Let's see who took part in the decision making, it says:

22 Then the apostles and the elders, together with the whole congregation, decided to send chosen men from among them to Antioch, along with Paul and Barʹna·bas; they sent Judas who was called Barʹsab·bas and Silas, who were leading men among the brothers

No Sir.
Oga, verse 5 is a request not a decision. It was never enforced.
Did the Governing Body/Council approve that request in verse 5?

The Governing Body did not give any instructions to subversive, FALSE brothers (apostates).[/b]

Oga, Acts 6:1-5 & 15:1-7,23 the principles is laid down in your Bible.
The Leaders/Governing Body/Council instructions were for all believers everywhere.
Did you see any sole proprietor pastorpreneur venture in the Bible book of Acts?

Check am nau.

Poor. Total lack of understanding. Try again. Don't stress me. Go back and reread the point.

What a shallow attempt to distort the holy scriptures!
Acts 9:26-28, Oga was Paul playing Ludo & Draft when he spent some time with the Apostles?

Did you not read Paul named God's will & Sosthenes for his Apostleship?

How does this affect the point I made?

After his conversion @ Acts 9:1-9, did Jesus direct Paul to set up a sole proprietor pastorpreneur venture?

Oga,go & study your Bible very well, let JWs help you.

If this is the best you can give, then it is better you go back to 'learn to read and write" brochure because you obviously don't understand sentences or you are deliberately pretending not to know.

Sometimes I deliberately ignore most of the rubbish you reply. But so that you don't think you said something, I chose to reply to this one. Guy you de far!

MaxInDHouse:
So you're not even sure if JWs are right or wrong?

Ọmọ why all these wahala if you can't say for sure?

Being theologically right or wrong is different from who will be saved. Many if their theology is wrong. But who will be saved has been left in the hand of Jesus. Salvation is a broad subject. There are many scriptures to review on that, but even after that, I lawyer can quote this or that section of the constitution, but the judge has the final say.

Are there scriptures that can be used to prove that Jehovah's witnesses won't be saved? Yes. But can the great judge disagree? Yes. How is that possible? God is love. He is also merciful, he is slow to anger, he wants all to be saved etc. These factor may affect the way he will judge anyone. No one should be dogmatic on that subject. That's the point.

MaxInDHouse:
So judging from your point of view, if the so
called PIMOS decide to stay in the organization can they be saved?

Many of them are atheist remember. There is no scripture saying God will save those who remain atheist. But some are not atheist. With regards to who will be saved, no one can say that for sure. Jesus has been given the power to make that decision. What ever anyone says as to who will be saved is just his opinion. Jesus makes the final decision.

If someone has faith is Jesus ransom sacrifice, that is a good milestone. Those who have such faith have my respect. Will all with such faith be saved? Jesus will decide.

In there Frequently Asked Question, the Witnesses explains what the Governing Body means:

"The Governing Body is a small group of mature Christians who provide direction for Jehovah’s Witnesses worldwide. Their work is twofold:


They oversee the preparation of Bible-based instruction through the publications, meetings, and schools of Jehovah’s Witnesses.​—Luke 12:42.


They supervise the worldwide work of Jehovah’s Witnesses by directing our public ministry and overseeing the use of donated assets.


The Governing Body follows the pattern set by “the apostles and elders in Jerusalem” in the first century, who made important decisions on behalf of the entire Christian congregation. (Acts 15:2) Like those faithful men, the members of the Governing Body are not the leaders of our organization. They look to the Bible for guidance, acknowledging that Jehovah God has appointed Jesus Christ as the Head of the congregation.​—1 Corinthians 11:3; Ephesians 5:​23."


From what they said here, we see what they mean when the term Governing Body is used. Few scriptures is quoted here to back up their claim but that doesn't mean that there are no other scriptures they use to support their view. My interest is on the scripturalness of the claim. Was there a body who served the function as the Governing body of Jehovah's witnesses do today? Let's see.

The chief reason they see things this way is because of what happened in the first century about the circumcision. It all started from the verse they cited, acts 15;2. Let's read from verse 1:

"Now some men came down from Ju·deʹa and began to teach the brothers: “Unless you get circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.”  2 But after quite a bit of dissension and disputing by Paul and Barʹna·bas with them, it was arranged for Paul, Barʹna·bas, and some of the others to go up to the apostles and elders in Jerusalem regarding this issue."

The point the above publication wants to make is that the case was referred to the apostles and the elders in Jerusalem to make the decision. According to JW, these apostles and elders constitute the governing body in the first century that made decisions for the entire congregation back then. Reading through the whole chapter, one might feel that verse 23 give credence to this view. It says:

23 They wrote this and sent it through them: “The apostles and the elders, your brothers, to those brothers in Antioch, Syria, and Ci·liʹcia who are from the nations: Greetings!"

And reading further, we also noticed that Paul and Barnabas went on distributing these decision to the brothers as Acts 16;4 reported. From JW view, these shows that there were men in Jerusalem who made decisions for the entire worldwide christians of the first century. So, the Governing Body follow their lead. But there are more scriptures to consider on this subject that could reveal a different conclusion.

Let's first look at those who partook in the decision making in that meeting. The part that is often omitted by the JW leadership when making their claim is verse 22. Let's see who took part in the decision making, it says:

22 Then the apostles and the elders, together with the whole congregation, decided to send chosen men from among them to Antioch, along with Paul and Barʹna·bas; they sent Judas who was called Barʹsab·bas and Silas, who were leading men among the brothers."

Yes, the apostles and the elders were there, but there were many others in the Jerusalem congregation that had a say in the decision making. In fact notice that this, let's call it council, decided to send representatives to those congregations. So it was not only apostles and elders. If we follow JW reasoning, it then means that the Governing Body is not just apostles and elders, but also members of the congregation. See also verse 4.

There are others as well, perhaps they are also part of the congregation mentioned in verse 4 and 22. See verse 5

5 But some of those of the sect of the Pharisees who had become believers stood up from their seats and said: “It is necessary to circumcise them and command them to observe the Law of Moses.”

All these joined in the decision making. If we follow the JW logic, these should also be part of the Governing body.

Another aspect that is often omitted is that even the men who went to Antioch and preached that wrong message is among the Governing Body as well. See how the bible puts it:

24 Since we have heard that some went out from among us and caused you trouble with what they have said, trying to subvert you, although we did not give them any instructions,"

So these is not a governing body making decisions for the entire christians back then, this is much like a council, a snod, an ecumenical gathering of church leaders to settle doctrinal differences. These issue was settled between Leaders in Paul's territory and those at Jerusalem. The letter was not sent to Rome, Samaria, Colossi, Ethiopia, Babylon etc. So it was not to an entire Christian church functioning in the first century. True, the congregation in Jerusalem was unique, the whole christian movement began from there, the apostles who worked with Jesus worshiped there. Just as any General Overseer or founder of a church today dies, his close ministry team have much authority since they worked with the founder, so it is with the apostles. But they do not exercise the same possessive authority the GB of JWs exercise today. Notice what GB of JW say they do:

A. Oversee the preparation of bible-based instructions through the publications, Meetings, schools:

The question is, did the apostles oversee the preparation of bible based instructions prepared in the first century? No.

After preaching and making disciples without the authority of any Governing Body, Paul wrote a letter directly to the Corinthian congregation unilaterally. No GB approval. (1cor 1:1) That should in fact be Paul's second letter to that congregation. Among the things Paul handled without Governing body approval are: Congregation discipline (1cor 5), counsel on marriage and singleness (1cor 7), Instructions for orderly Congregation worship (1cor 11-14) etc. Paul on his own appointed representatives to the congregation he formed, namely, Timothy, Titus etc. He even wrote a letter to them, instructing them to remove disorderly ones, appoint elders and deacons, congregation fund use (1tim 5-6) etc. These men served as circuit overseers as JWs call it. But while GB of JWs appoint circuit overseers, Paul appointed those in his territory. He even gave them Circuit Overseer Manual eg, 1 and 2nd Timothy, the book of Titus.

So Paul have in himself all the functions the Governing body of JWs says they are overseeing. None of these instruction did he consult with the elders in Jerusalem. He was the General Overseer of the church he formed.

We can be sure that others who had congregations they formed back then had the same authority over the areas they formed, like Philip in Samaria, Epaphras in Colossi, Peter in Babylon, Barnabas later in Cyprus, etc.


B. They supervise the worldwide work of Jehovah’s Witnesses by directing our public ministry and overseeing the use of donated assets.

These too has no first century precedence.

Notice how Paul and Barnabas began what we will call a missionary work.

Acts 13
As they were ministering to Jehovah and fasting, the holy spirit said: “Set aside for me Barʹna·bas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.”  3 Then after fasting and praying, they laid their hands on them and sent them off."

The holy spirit appointed them missionaries. So, what happened next? They ran to Jerusalem to get an approval? No. The elders in Antioch laid their hands, and off they went. They formed congregations, appointed elders and deacons and later Paul wrote them instructions as we see in point A.

After their missionary work, did they run to jerusalem? Again, no. See how chapter 14 said it:

From there they sailed off for Antioch, where they had been entrusted to the undeserved kindness of God for the work they had now completed. 27 When they had arrived and had gathered the congregation together, they related the many things God had done by means of them, and that he had opened to the nations the door to faith. 28 So they spent considerable time with the disciples."

They finished the work, and gathered the congregation. For what? To submit their report, lol. But not to the non existent GB, but to those who sent them, the elders in Antioch. And even their second missionary journey began from Antioch. And it is totally, I mean totally impossible for any person to be a missionary of JWs without the GB approval. Impossible!

What about donated fund? The apostles handled the fund in the congregation in Jerusalem, but did they handle worldwide congregation fund? No.

Read for yourself 1tim 5, you will see the instruction Paul gave to his circuit overseer, Timothy, on how to use that fund in helping the needy.

Acts 11:28-30 reported a case of famine where the disciples in Antioch considered sending relief to brothers in Jerusalem. 30 says:

30 and this they did, sending it to the elders by the hand of Barʹna·bas and Saul."

They made the contribution, they decided who will take it to the congregation in Jerusalem. Jerusalem didn't oversee how they use their fund.

Truly, there was no Governing Body, Jesus made appointment of who served as his steward, and those he appointed form congregations and cared for them as he directs them through the spirit.

MightySparrow:
If you have any of them near you, be praying that God in His mercy should deliver them from delusion.

I put all of them in prayers, they are still God's creation and He loves them just as He loves me and all in the body of Christ. In fact, it is out of love that I undertook to preach to them on this board on specific teachings they misunderstand, so that any sincere one can see how their position isn't right.

MaxInDHouse:
You don't need to continue deceiving yourself.
There were thousands of Rabbis (religious teachers) in the Jewish community of the first century. When Jesus' teachings began to sound like heresy in the ears of his disciples most of them left him {John 6:61-66} to go and find teachers in other Jewish sects only the twelve remained with him.
Jesus asked those remaining:
“You do not want to go also, do you?” John 6:67
Simon Peter responded:
“Lord, whom shall we go away to? You have sayings of everlasting life. We have believed and have come to know that you are the Holy One of God.” John 6:68-69

So they couldn't leave because according to Peter they're convinced beyond all reasoning that there's no better teacher for everlasting life than Jesus. In the same manner there is no sense in forming a community over a religion you know is not worth it if you're sure of better options out there.
If they're trapped It's not that anyone is holding them back they just can't find a better performing group of people who have formed one big and happy global family of peace loving worshipers!

I said go to the community of PIMOS in reddit and hear them speak. All you said above is not the reason they are still in. They are trapped. That's why they rather leak sensitive information about JW to the public. There inside attack has cost the organization millions of dollars as they bring to the public what is not intended for the public. Go and hear for yourself. Many of them are atheists, they care less about religion, but they carry bag and preach. If they see any injustice, they cry out in a coded way undetected. Why don't they just leave? Because of the shunning policy. They can't handle being shunned by friends and families. So they pretend as if they are with you guys, and destroy you within. That's what bad leadership method have cost you. I will one day write a post about shunning. You will see where you guys got it wrong in your interpretation.

oteneaaron:
Their biggest enemies are their own publications.

Every single thing they have accused other religious groups of doing, they have done way worse.

Such disgusting hypocrites.

It is no surprise, for there was a prophecy saying that such people will arise. 2tim 3:6,7 says:

"From among these arise men who slyly work their way into households and captivate weak women loaded down with sins, led by various desires, 7 always learning and yet never able to come to an accurate knowledge of truth."

Jw witnesses have a different understanding of Acts 1:11. Let's read

Acts 1:11
11and said: “Men of Galʹi·lee, why do you stand looking into the sky? This Jesus who was taken up from you into the sky will come in the same manner as you have seen him going into the sky.”

There Publications explains the verse thus:

15 The angels said that Jesus would return, not in the same form, but “in the same manner.” In what manner did he depart? He was out of sight when the angels spoke. Only those few men, the apostles, perceived that Jesus had left the vicinity of the earth and was on his way to his Father in heaven. The manner of Christ’s return was to be similar. So it has been. Today, only those with spiritual discernment realize that Jesus is present in kingly power. (Luke 17:20) We need to discern the evidence of his presence and convey it to others so that they too may see the urgency of our times."

From the publication, the point is:

Only the JW anointed discerned that Jesus had supposedly returned in 1914. As they believe, that discernment by the anointed of JWs was how they saw Jesus returned as the angels spoke in acts 1:11.

Why did they believe so?
Because the angels made their statement after Jesus had gone off view, and that it was only the apostles who saw him leave.

However, does that view make sense? No. Let's first agree that the word manner doesn't emphasize the form with which Jesus left. That was not the point in the angels words. It is manner, but the way the JWs apply the meaning of manner is totally against the context. Let's see:

The angels says "This Jesus who was taken up from you into the sky will come in the same manner as you have seen him going into the sky.”

The phrase didn't stop at "in the same manner", but it continued "as you have seen him going into the sky". So the manner has to do with the process with which he ascended into the sky. The process/manner/method will follow a reverse order, in that he will descend to the earth. Yes, the point of tropos (Greek word for manner) is not about the form of body he will return, but the process or way with which he ascended.

However, the JWs says that the manner or process has to do with the fact that only the apostles were present and that they alone saw him. So his return will not be discerned by others except the JW anointed.

After the word manner, the angels continued "... as you have seen him going into the sky". This emphasize a reverse order in his return. None of Jehovah witnesses saw him return. So there was no reverse order in JW return of Christ as the angels say. The JW rather says that the anointed saw the sign that he is a king in heaven as world war occured in 1914. But that is just a sign of a supposed return. That is not what the angels said. The angels say we will see him, not the sign. There are two opposite words used by the angels... Going and coming. Jesus went to heaven, what remains is for him to return (coming). As he is seen going, he will also be seen coming back. That is the correct application of the word tropos (manner).

The JW interpretation replaced seeing with discerning or realization so as to shift the meaning of the angels words to something that will agree with their 1914 theology.

The fact is that the apostles did not just realize that he was going to heaven nor did they discern he was going, rather they saw him[i][/i] going. They did not discern any sign that he was going to heaven, rather they saw that he was going to heaven. In the same way, we will see him returning. That is the proper application of that word "manner".

MaxInDHouse:
Meaning they know there's no better religion out there otherwise they could have easily left to follow a better performing group!

No, they are trapped. Go to the community and hear for yourself.

MightySparrow:
https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxpmZ8udr3SVmwA4jbe2V_DJvql272a55q?si=R1gW64705PaxqMCv



The Jehovah's Witnesses's Governing Body has prized themselves as the sole custodian and dispenser of God's knowledge and are also saddled with the responsibility of separating the sheep from the goats.

Since 1919, Jehovah handled commissioned them to undertake these tasks. Though, they teach that the Holy Spirit does not talk to man anymore, how the Holy Spirit gives them conflicting information, interpretation, and direction is still a thing to wonder at.

One Jeffrey Winder, supposedly, one of the Governing Body members was telling members that any errors in their interpretations of the scriptures are backed up by Jehovah Himself. So, the Governing Body does not have to apologize to anyone for any reason whatsoever. They shift the blame to Jehovah and the Holy Spirit.

I personally feel that this group are master deceivers who has mastered the art of hypnotizing their innocent, ignorant sheepies. Interestingly, some of these followers are highly placed people in the careers, lawyers, academics, captains of industries etc How they are comfortable with this High level of manipulation beats my imagination.

C C:
MaximumSide
Emusan
Achorlardey
Janosky
Aemmyjay
other witnesses.

That is what pride can cause. They keep blaspheming the holy spirit by accusing the holy spirit for their errors.

Many who are there as JWs are not in agreement with these doctrines. In fact witnesses, despite their relative low number harbors more PIMOs than any other Christian religion. PIMO meaning Physically In, but Mentally Out. The word PIMO was even coined by these fellows and exjw community. These PIMOs have contributed to the huge exposure of JW secrets, to the extent that their confidential documents and videos make it online before even their elders receive it. Even the Annual Meeting of 2023 is already available to the exjw community while the faithful JWs are told that the remaining part will be available in January 2024. The reason for this insider-destroyers is because of their shunning policy. An unscriptural doctrine that makes one rather stay and destroy them from within than leave and join another church. They reap what they sow.

So don't think that all you see carry bag really believe what they are taught. Many don't. But they are trapped.

Jehovah's witnesses teach that a big issue of the rightness of God's rulership arose in Eden. In there book, What Does The Bible Really Teach, this is said:

"10 To find out why God allows suffering, we need to think back to the time when suffering began. When Satan led Adam and Eve into disobeying Jehovah, an important question was raised. Satan did not call into question Jehovah’s power. Even Satan knows that there is no limit to Jehovah’s power. Rather, Satan questioned Jehovah’s right to rule. By calling God a liar who withholds good from his subjects, Satan charged that Jehovah is a bad ruler. (Read Genesis 3:2-5.) Satan implied that mankind would be better off without God’s rulership. This was an attack on Jehovah’s sovereignty, his right to rule."

So they view the exchange that happened at Gen 3:2-5 as a challenge to God's right to rule. God agreeing to allow Satan prove that he is the better ruler made Him allowed the world to be ruled by Satan. It is taught that Satan would show by his rulership whether he is a good ruler or not. After the challenge is proved false by the end of the world, Satan and his cohorts will be destroyed. That would be after the one thousand years.

The article further went on to prove that this was the reason God doesn't interfer with human rulership, so as not to help Satan until he and the humans he rules finally realize that Jehovah is the better ruler, not Satan. In other words, God won't help Satan in any way till the time to prove his point elapses. These, according to JWs has brought the evil we see around us because Satan is running his tenure.

There are challenges to this conclusion reached by the witnesses.

1. Satan has been sentenced before the end of his rule already:

JWs believe that Gen 3:15 is about Satan being crushed by Jesus one day in the future. Why? Because of the deception in Eden. In fact, what God did after Adam sinned is like a court session where God asked all the individuals involved what happened, and finally pass judgment on them. How can Satan be sentenced for a future destruction when he is yet to prove his point?

So obviously God's plan was not to execute Satan immediately.

2. Noah's flood will be like God helping Satan then:

If Satan, who the witnesses view as a stubborn student on the chalkboard, is running his tenure, why then does God come to assist him by destroying evil men during Noah's day? Yet, Satan's tenure of ruling the world is still ongoing? Should the destruction not have been an end to the challenge if it was true?

We also know that God destroyed the Sodomites for serious sin on their part. Is that not God helping Satan if the JW is correct? Or at least a breach of contract.

3. God ruling the Israelite would have been God helping Satan:

If Satan was still running his tenure, why does God have a special people, the Israelites, whom He ruled? Would that not have been like God helping Satan in his rulership of the world?

4. Why did God send the Demons to Tartarus during Satan's tenure?

Why were the demons not killed immediately when they sinned since it was because of Satan's challenge that he was left alive according to JWs? Or did the demons also raise their own individual challenge to God? Some witnesses might say that it was because of the same issue of Universal Sovereignty raised by Satan, that's why they were not killed. But why then were they sent to Tartarus? Which is a form of punishment. And why are they sentenced to destruction in the future when Satan's rulership has not ended?


The witnesses also say that Satan introduced another challenge to human integrity during Job's day. According to them, Satan is saying that no man can ever remain faithful if he undergoes severe suffering of his property or when his life is threatened.

The witnesses say everyone is facing this challenge on earth. But there are some issues here. If job has proved that a man can still be on God's side after severe suffering, why is it being said by the JWs that the challenge is still ongoing? Has Job's integrity not debunked it? Jesus' integrity too proved Satan a liar.

We can see that this position of JWs is not sensible. God has always been in charge. See how Dan 4:17 puts it:

17 This is by the decree of watchers, and the request is by the word of the holy ones, so that people living may know that the Most High is Ruler in the kingdom of mankind and that he gives it to whomever he wants, and he sets up over it even the lowliest of men.”

True Satan is called the ruler of the world, but not the ruler of every individual. God is still the Ruler. But since God takes time to execute judgment, those evil ones like Satan uses that time space to deceive and cause havoc. Satan goes out to get people to be against God, and those he gets is viewed by God to be under the rule of Satan. There was no contract of rulership. God let's Satan have all that chose to disobey Him. God has already passed sentence on both Satan and those who follow him, but because of God's patience, Satan is rather using it to deceive.

We need to know that God doesn't always execute judgment speedily. At times He passes a judgement, but then fixes time of execution in the future. The time lag is what people misuse. There is a reason for the time lag.

Prophet Troy Black says what the Lord told him in a vision about Mary. Towards the end of the video, the vision begins.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64MXvjx2ps8?si=dj0msieg-ZhWECNm

Randy Kay had a message directly from the Lord in heaven to Christians. Take this serious, it's no joke. It is not an advertisement of a pastor. No. It is the message from the Lord. You might want to start from the 27mins mark if you don't want to hear the prelude to the message.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XM42pR-sKSQ?si=A0kIFxS96QD6wu1d

In their Enjoy Life Book, JWs says this:

"The Bible book of Daniel indicated that God’s Kingdom would begin ruling at the end of a period called “seven times.” (Daniel 4:16, 17)"

That scripture was not discussing when God's kingdom by Jesus will rule in the future. It was discussing Nebuchadnezzar's rule. What will be the result after seven years? That place they cited says:

"so that people living may know that the Most High is Ruler in the kingdom of mankind.'

So what will happen to Nebuchadnezzar will show that God is already a Ruler in the Kingdom of mankind.

What about the seven times?

The JWs according to that book Enjoy Life says that the seven times means 2520 years.

How did they arrive at this?

At Rev 12:6 mention was made of 1,260 days. These days is said to be the same as "a time, times and half a time" in verse 14. In other words 3 and half times. Now Dan 4:16 above mentioned seven times. This will mean two "3 and half times". Therefore since 3 and half times stands for 1260 days, two "3 and half times" will equal 2520 days. Then using the formula of a day for a year, we have 2520 years. If you count this from 607 when they believe Jerusalem was destroyed, we land in 1914.

There is a problem with this calculation.

It is true that 3 and half times amounts to 1260 days as that scripture shows, but that only applies in days, not years. In other words, when ever you want to convert 3 and half times to days, you should get 1260 days. But when ever you want to convert 3 and half times to years, it amounts to 3 and half years, not 1260 years.

See how it goes:

1260 days equals approx to 3 years and a half year. In the bible one month equals 30 days.

So if I am 2 years old. If you want to convert that my age to days, it will be 720 days. But it will be wrong that in trying to convert it to years, you now say that I am 720 years. No na.

This is consistent with all the biblical mention of a time, times and half a time in the bible. It's yearly conversion is always 3 and half years, but in days, it is 1260 days. It is believed, even by JWs, that the seven times of Nebuchadnezzar amounted to seven years. This also supports that idea that conversion into years is 3 and half years, not 1260 years.

2. The book went further to say concerning the 1914:

"Centuries later, Jesus referred to that same time period as “the appointed times of the nations,” and he taught that it had not yet ended. (Luke 21:24) As we will see, the seven times ended in the year 1914."

Luke 21:24 doesn't have any link to what happened in Jerusalem when Babylonians came to destroy them in 607 BCE according to JW chronology.

Notice that the book linked the appointed times in Luke 21:24 to the statement of Daniel 4:16, namely, seven times. However, the witnesses do not teach that Nebuchadnezzar had his dream in 607 BCE. So how can the seven times of Nebuchadnezzar start to count from 607 BCE.?

Secondly, let's look at what Jesus actually said from their translation.

From verse 20:

However, when you see Jerusalem surrounded by encamped armies, then know that the desolating of her has drawn near. 21 Then let those in Ju·deʹa begin fleeing to the mountains, let those in the midst of her leave, and let those in the countryside not enter into her, 22 because these are days for meting out justice in order that all the things written may be fulfilled. 23 Woe to the pregnant women and those nursing a baby in those days! For there will be great distress on the land and wrath against this people. 24 And they will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled."

Notice that the whole verse is futuristic. Verse 24 starts off by saying that " they WILL fall by the edge of the sword". And then, " Jerusalem WILL be trampled on..."

So Jesus is just saying what had not yet happened, but what WILL happen in the future. Some might say that the " WILL be" in that verse in Greek is just " will be being" as to indicate a present continuous action. But it doesn't make sense, because the WILL indicating a future action is there. One scholar proposed a better interpretation. He says this Greek means that Jerusalem will be trampled on and continue so till the appointed times of the nations is complete. That make more sense. Also notice that the verse 24 started off with "they WILL fall by the edge of the sword". So that WILL there indicates future trampling of Jerusalem and not a trampling that happened as far back as 607 BCE.

Jerusalem in that book of Luke is not davidic line of rulers, it is clearly the city of Jerusalem.

Thirdly, Jesus became a king in the first century. JWs will have us believe that Jesus was just sitting on God's right hand till 1914 when he climbed a throne.

That is directly contradicted by 1 Cor 15:25. It says:

25 For he must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet."

Before his enemies is put under his feet, he has to be a ruler.

Fourthly, Jesus while on earth made a triumphant entry into Jerusalem as a king.

Matt 21:
5 “Tell the daughter of Zion: ‘Look! Your king is coming to you, mild-tempered and mounted on a donkey, yes, on a colt, the offspring of a beast of burden.’”

That fulfilled in the first century not in 1914.

Another point is, if Jesus became king in 1914, then the ruler of the world is Jesus, not Satan. It will interest you to know that the JWs see Daniel 7:14 to have been fulfilled in 1914.

14 And to him there were given rulership, honor, and a kingdom, that the peoples, nations, and language groups should all serve him. His rulership is an everlasting rulership that will not pass away, and his kingdom will not be destroyed.

If it did fulfill in 1914, then Jesus is the ruler of the world. The whole world is serving him. Why call Satan again.

Another point that shows that he should be ruler of the world is at Rev 11:15

15 The seventh angel blew his trumpet. And there were loud voices in heaven, saying: “The kingdom of the world has become the Kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he will rule as king forever and ever.”

So it is contradictory to still say that Satan is the ruler of the world.

This is part of my ministry to you witnesses, what you do with it is your choice.